Evaluation device, evaluation method, and program

Abstract

To output an evaluation result regarding trustworthiness of a network, an evaluation device according to the present invention includes: an evaluation result acquisition means that acquires a trustworthiness evaluation result for each instrument; a target information acquisition means that acquires configuration information pertaining to the network to be evaluated, instrument information pertaining to the instrument forming the network, and a trustworthiness evaluation index of the network; a trustworthiness evaluation means that evaluates the trustworthiness of the network on the basis of the configuration information, the instrument information, the trustworthiness evaluation index, and the trustworthiness evaluation result for the instrument; and an output means that outputs a trustworthiness evaluation result for the network.

Description

Evaluation device, evaluation method, and recording medium

[0001] The present invention relates to the evaluation of systems such as networks.

[0002] As information on devices connected to a network such as the Internet, reliability related to the security of the devices connected to the network is provided as described in Patent Document 1. In this patent document, reliability is a score for the device calculated based on the strength of the device's security, etc.

[0003] International Publication No. 2020 / 184535

[0004] The trust required by a service provider that provides services via a network is different from the trust related to the security of the device, and is the trust such as the trust in maintaining the operation of the network used to provide the service. However, Patent Document 1 does not disclose how to evaluate the trust set for the network.

[0005] An object of the present invention is to provide an evaluation device that outputs the results of a network trust evaluation.

[0006] An evaluation device in one form of the present invention includes an evaluation result acquisition means for acquiring a trust evaluation result for each device, a target information acquisition means for acquiring configuration information of the network to be evaluated, device information about the devices that make up the network, and a trust evaluation index for the network, a trust evaluation means for evaluating the trust of the network based on the configuration information, the device information, the trust evaluation index, and the trust evaluation result of the devices, and an output means for outputting the trust evaluation result of the network.

[0007] An evaluation method in one embodiment of the present invention obtains a trust evaluation result for each device, obtains configuration information of the network to be evaluated, device information about the devices that make up the network, and a trust evaluation index for the network, evaluates the trust of the network based on the configuration information, device information, trust evaluation index, and the trust evaluation result of the devices, and outputs the network trust evaluation result.

[0008] In one embodiment of the present invention, a recording medium stores a program that causes a computer to execute the following processes: a process of acquiring a trust evaluation result for each device; a process of acquiring configuration information of the network to be evaluated, device information about the devices that make up the network, and a trust evaluation index for the network; a process of evaluating the trust of the network based on the configuration information, device information, trust evaluation index, and the trust evaluation result for the devices; and a process of outputting the trust evaluation result for the network.

[0009] According to the present invention, it is possible to obtain an effect of outputting the trust evaluation result for a network.

[0010] 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device according to a first embodiment; FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a trust evaluation unit; FIG. 3 is a flow diagram showing an example of the operation of an evaluation device; FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device according to a second embodiment; FIG. 5 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device according to a third embodiment; FIG. 6 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device according to a fourth embodiment; FIG. 7 is a block diagram showing an example of the hardware configuration of an evaluation device; and FIG. 8 is a block diagram explaining an example of the configuration of a system that uses an evaluation device.

[0011] Device manufacturers provide reliability related to the security of the device when it operates alone in a standard evaluation environment. For example, device manufacturers provide a score for the device as a reliability score calculated based on the strength of the security of the device when it operates alone in a standard evaluation environment. However, the behavior of the devices that make up the network will differ if the network configuration and the services provided using the network are different. For example, even if the same device is used, the device's behavior will differ if the network configuration, such as the number of devices included in the network and the connections between the devices, is different. Furthermore, the device's behavior will differ if the services provided are different. Therefore, the trust required by service providers that use networks differs from the security-related reliability provided by device manufacturers based on a general evaluation environment.

[0012] Furthermore, the operation of a system such as a network is an interrelated operation of multiple devices that make up the system. Therefore, when providing a service using a network, it is desirable that the trust required by the service provider is not the trust of each individual device that makes up the network, but the trust of the entire network used to provide the service. Note that network trust refers to the reliability of the network, for example, the reliability of maintaining stable operation of the network. For example, network trust is used by service recipients to decide whether or not to use a service that uses the service provider's network.

[0013] Therefore, as described below, an embodiment of the present invention evaluates the trustworthiness of a network used by a service provider or the like, and outputs a network trustworthiness evaluation result. In the following description, the embodiment evaluates the trustworthiness of a network. However, this is only an example of an evaluation target. The embodiment is not limited to a network, and may also evaluate the trustworthiness of a system configured of multiple devices, such as factory equipment.

[0014] 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device 10 according to Embodiment 1. The evaluation device 10 includes an evaluation result acquisition unit 110, a target information acquisition unit 120, a trust evaluation unit 130, and an output unit 140.

[0015] The evaluation result acquisition unit 110 acquires the trust evaluation result of each device. For example, the evaluation result acquisition unit 110 acquires the trust evaluation result of the device from an organization that has previously evaluated the trust of the device from an objective standpoint, such as a consortium. The evaluation result acquisition unit 110 may store the acquired trust evaluation result of the device in a storage device (not shown). Note that the evaluation device 10 may evaluate the trust of at least some of the devices and store the evaluation result in a storage device (not shown). In this case, the evaluation result acquisition unit 110 may acquire the trust evaluation result of the device from the storage device.

[0016] Trustworthiness refers to the reliability of a network or device, for example, the reliability of maintaining stable operation of the network or device. The trust evaluation index is a perspective for evaluating the trustworthiness of a network or device, such as the presence or absence of unauthorized functions in the network or device, the inspection status, and the visualization status of configuration information. The trust evaluation result is the result of evaluating the network or device based on the trust evaluation index. It is desirable that the trust evaluation result is a numerical value that is easy to handle. However, the trust evaluation result is not limited to a numerical value and may be data in a format other than a numerical value, such as "excellent / good / fair / poor" or "high / medium / low." Specific examples of trustworthiness are as follows: Below, trustworthiness will be explained using a network. The trustworthiness of a device can be determined by replacing the network in the following explanation with the device as appropriate.

[0017] (1) Outage Risk Trustworthiness regarding outage risk is the possibility of a network outage and the predicted outage time in the event of an outage. Alternatively, outage risk is the mean time between outages or the mean time to recovery. Outage risk may be the risk of outage in part of a network. For example, a network with a low outage risk is more trustworthy than a network with a high outage risk.

[0018] (2) Information Leakage Risk Trustworthiness regarding information leakage risk refers to the presence or possibility of information leakage in the network providing the service, and the status of measures to prevent information leakage. The status of measures to prevent information leakage may be, for example, whether all measures to prevent information leakage have been implemented, whether measures to prevent serious information leakage have been implemented, whether measures to prevent information leakage are known, or whether measures are not known. For example, a network with a low risk of information leakage is more trustworthy than a network with a high risk of information leakage.

[0019] (3) Backdoors The trustworthiness of a backdoor refers to the presence or absence of a backdoor in a network, or the possibility of the presence of a backdoor. Alternatively, the trustworthiness of a backdoor may refer to the backdoor inspection status, such as the backdoor inspection method, inspection scope, or inspection time in a network. Examples of backdoor inspection methods include inspection using an inspection application, binary inspection of a program running on a device that constitutes the network, or source code inspection of the program. For example, a network that has been inspected for backdoors has higher trustworthiness than a network that has not been inspected for backdoors.

[0020] (4) Risk Assessment The trustworthiness of risk assessment includes whether or not a risk assessment inspection of network vulnerabilities has been conducted, the inspection results, the status of countermeasure implementation, the timing of the inspection, or the time elapsed since the inspection. The status of vulnerability countermeasure implementation includes whether countermeasures have been implemented for all vulnerabilities, whether countermeasures for serious vulnerabilities have been implemented, whether countermeasures for vulnerabilities have been identified, or whether countermeasures are not identified. For example, a network that has undergone a risk assessment inspection is more trustworthy than a network that has not undergone a risk assessment inspection.

[0021] (5) Incident Response The reliability of incident response is the defined state of response when an incident occurs in a network. The reliability of incident response may include the range of incidents for which responses are defined, such as a defined response for a serious incident. For example, a network with defined incident responses is more reliable than a network without defined incident responses.

[0022] (6) Performance Evaluation Test Results The trustworthiness of the performance evaluation test results is the presence or absence of performance evaluation test results and the performance content of the test results. The trustworthiness of the performance evaluation test results may be the test status of the performance evaluation, such as the performance evaluation test method, test scope, test time, or elapsed time since the test was conducted. For example, a network that has been tested for performance evaluation is more trustworthy than a network that has not been tested for performance evaluation.

[0023] (7) Business The trustworthiness of a business is the state of understanding of the business for providing a service or the overall business of the service provider, and the state of preparation for business recovery work. The state of understanding of the business is, for example, the state of understanding the scope of impact of each business, or the state of understanding the priority of each business. For example, a network in which the business is understood is more trustworthy than a network in which the business is not understood. The state of preparation for recovery work is, for example, the state of preparation for recovery from a business with a large scope of impact or a business with a high priority when an incident occurs. For example, a network in which recovery work is prepared is more trustworthy than a network in which recovery work is not prepared.

[0024] (8) Developer The trustworthiness of a developer is the state of understanding of the developer attributes of the network and devices, etc. The understanding state may be, for example, that the attributes of all developers are understood, that some attributes are not understood, or that some developers' attributes are not understood. Attributes may be, for example, nationality, affiliation, development location, or past experience. Developer attributes are not limited to the attributes of individuals, but may also be the attributes of corporations or organizations, such as development manufacturers. For example, a network in which developer attributes are understood is more trustworthy than a network in which developer attributes are not understood.

[0025] (9) Supply Chain The trustworthiness of a supply chain refers to the trustworthiness of companies and the like related to the supply chain of a network that provides a service. Companies related to the supply chain are, for example, companies that design, provide, maintain, and manage the network that provides the service. Furthermore, the trustworthiness of a company refers, for example, to the status of trust inspections at each company and the contents of the inspection results. The status of inspections refers to whether or not an inspection has been conducted, the extent to which inspections have been conducted, or the extent to which inspections have not been conducted. For example, a network in which the trustworthiness of companies that make up the supply chain has been inspected is more trustworthy than a network in which the trustworthiness of companies that make up the supply chain has not been inspected.

[0026] The target information acquiring unit 120 acquires configuration information of the network to be evaluated and device information about devices that make up the network. Furthermore, the target information acquiring unit 120 acquires a trust evaluation index for the network. For example, the target information acquiring unit 120 may acquire the configuration information, device information, and trust evaluation index from a device operated by a service provider or the like.

[0027] Network trust evaluation indexes are perspectives for evaluating the trustworthiness of a network, such as the presence or absence of unauthorized functions in devices, the inspection status, and the visualization status of configuration information. For example, network trust evaluation indexes include the presence or absence of unauthorized functions in the network, the inspection status, and the visualization status of configuration information. Furthermore, network trust evaluation indexes are evaluation indexes that meet the needs of service providers, such as for service providers to demonstrate the trustworthiness of their networks to service recipients, such as users of the services they provide. For example, a trust evaluation index is an evaluation index for the above-mentioned trust items, such as the "possibility of a backdoor." A trust evaluation index may be a single evaluation index, a collection of multiple evaluation indexes, an integration of multiple evaluation indexes, or an evaluation index calculated using multiple evaluation indexes, such as an average. Note that a service provider may create a trust evaluation index based on the services it provides and the network it uses. Alternatively, a service provider may obtain a trust evaluation index from a service recipient or create a trust evaluation index in accordance with a request from a service recipient or the like.

[0028] Configuration information is information about the configuration of devices included in a network. Configuration information includes, for example, the connection topology of the devices that make up the network, routes, communication protocols including wired and wireless, and equipment such as connecting cables in the case of wired connections. Device information is information about each device that makes up the network. Device information includes, for example, the manufacturer name, product name, model number, whether or not options are installed, purchase date, and firmware version of each device that makes up the network.

[0029] The target information acquisition unit 120 may acquire information related to the service provider, such as the size of the service provider, the business type of the service provider, the industry or business type to which the service provider belongs, and stakeholders such as affiliates and competitors of the service provider.

[0030] The trust evaluation unit 130 evaluates the trust of the network based on the configuration information, device information, trust evaluation index, and the trust evaluation result of the device. If the target information acquisition unit 120 has acquired information related to the service provider as described above, the trust evaluation unit 130 may use the information related to the service provider in evaluating the trust. The trust evaluation unit 130 may use an evaluation method that corresponds to the network to be evaluated, the evaluation index, etc.

[0031] An example of an evaluation method in the trust evaluation unit 130 will be described with reference to the drawings. Fig. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of the trust evaluation unit 130. The trust evaluation unit 130 includes a test item creation unit 131, a test item determination unit 132, and an evaluation result creation unit 133.

[0032] The test item creation unit 131 creates test items for devices to evaluate the trustworthiness of a network based on the configuration information and the trust evaluation index. For example, the test item creation unit 131 uses the configuration information to identify one or more devices that correspond to the trust evaluation index of the network from among the devices that make up the network. Then, the test item creation unit 131 creates test items for evaluating the trust evaluation index of the identified devices.

[0033] For example, when the trust evaluation index is the presence or absence of a performance evaluation test result, the test item creation unit 131 creates, as a test item, an item for checking the presence or absence of a performance evaluation test result for each device to be tested. Alternatively, when the trust evaluation index is the possibility of a backdoor, the test item creation unit 131 creates, as a test item, an item for testing the possibility of a backdoor in the device to be tested. The test item creation unit 131 may create multiple test items for one trust evaluation index, or may create one test item for multiple trust evaluation indexes. The test item creation unit 131 may use device information when creating the test items.

[0034] The inspection item determination unit 132 determines the inspection items created above based on the device information and the device trust evaluation results. For example, if the inspection item is the presence or absence of inspection results for the performance evaluation of each device, the inspection item determination unit 132 first determines the performance evaluation items for each device based on the device information. Then, the inspection item determination unit 132 determines the presence or absence of inspection results for the performance evaluation items for each device based on the device trust evaluation results. Alternatively, when inspecting the possibility of a backdoor in a network, the inspection item determination unit 132 determines the possibility of a backdoor for each device based on the device information and the device trust evaluation results. The inspection item determination unit 132 may use configuration information in determining the inspection items.

[0035] The evaluation result creation unit 133 creates a network trust evaluation result based on the trust evaluation index and the analysis results of the test items. For example, the evaluation result creation unit 133 integrates or replaces the analysis results of the above test items to create the network trust evaluation result. For example, the format of the analysis results of the test items may differ for each test item. Alternatively, the analysis results of the test items may be in a data format that is difficult for anyone other than an expert to interpret. Alternatively, multiple analysis results may be associated with one trust evaluation index. Alternatively, one analysis result may be associated with multiple trust evaluation indexes. Therefore, the evaluation result creation unit 133 integrates or replaces the analysis results to correspond to the trust evaluation index, thereby creating the network trust evaluation result. In this way, the network trust evaluation result is the result of evaluating a network based on the network trust evaluation index, which is the reliability of the network and a perspective for evaluating the trust of the network.

[0036] The output unit 140 outputs the network trust evaluation result. For example, the output unit 140 outputs the network trust evaluation result to a device of a service provider or the like that uses the network. Alternatively, the output unit 140 may output the network trust evaluation result to a device of an insurance company that accepts insurance for service providers or the like that use the network. Alternatively, the output unit 140 may output the network trust evaluation result to a storage device accessible by service providers, service recipients, and the like, such as a storage device on the cloud. Alternatively, the output unit 140 may output the network trust evaluation result to a location accessible by service providers, service recipients, and the like, such as a homepage on the Internet.

[0037] 3 is a flow diagram showing an example of the operation of the evaluation device 10. The evaluation result acquisition unit 110 acquires the trust evaluation result of each device (step S301). The target information acquisition unit 120 acquires configuration information of the network to be evaluated, device information about the devices that make up the network, and a trust evaluation index for the network (step S302). The trust evaluation unit 130 evaluates the trust of the network based on the configuration information, device information, trust evaluation index, and the device trust evaluation result (step S303). The output unit 140 outputs the network trust evaluation result.

[0038] As described above, the evaluation device 10 according to the first embodiment stores the trust evaluation results for each device. The evaluation device 10 then acquires configuration information for the network to be evaluated, device information for the devices constituting the network, and a network trust evaluation index. The evaluation device 10 then evaluates the trust of the network based on the configuration information, device information, trust evaluation index, and the device trust evaluation results, and outputs the network trust evaluation results. In this way, the evaluation device 10 outputs a network trust evaluation result that meets the needs of service providers and the like, rather than the reliability related to the security of devices provided by device manufacturers and the like. As a result, for example, service providers and the like can obtain a network trust evaluation result that meets the needs of the service providers and the like from the evaluation device 10.

[0039] 4 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device 11 according to a second embodiment. The evaluation device 11 includes a certificate creation unit 150 in addition to the configuration of the evaluation device 10.

[0040] The certificate creation unit 150 creates a certificate for the network trust evaluation result. The certificate is data indicating that the network trust evaluation result has not been tampered with. The certificate creation unit 150 creates the certificate using, for example, electronic authentication or a blockchain.

[0041] Note that the certificate is often provided to a service recipient or the like together with the network trust evaluation result. Therefore, the certificate may include both the trust evaluation result and data indicating that the network trust evaluation result has not been tampered with. For the sake of convenience, the certificate will be hereinafter assumed to include the network trust evaluation result. Then, the output unit 140 outputs the certificate to a service provider or the like.

[0042] The evaluation device 10 of the first embodiment outputs a network trust evaluation result evaluated based on a trust evaluation index acquired from a service provider or the like. However, the network trust evaluation result in the first embodiment does not have a mechanism for preventing tampering. Therefore, the network trust evaluation result in the first embodiment is not necessarily in an appropriate format as a certificate to be submitted to a service recipient or the like who receives a service from the service provider. Therefore, the evaluation device 11 creates and outputs a certificate as data indicating that the network trust evaluation result has not been tampered with. As a result, for example, the service provider can provide the certificate output by the evaluation device 11 to the service recipient or the like to indicate that the network trust evaluation result has not been tampered with.

[0043] 5 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device 12 according to a third embodiment. The evaluation device 12 includes an improvement plan formulation unit 160 in addition to the configuration of the evaluation device 10. The evaluation device 12 may also include a certificate creation unit 150.

[0044] The improvement plan formulation unit 160 formulates an improvement plan for the network's trustworthiness based on the network's trustworthiness evaluation results. Formulating an improvement plan for the network's trustworthiness involves determining measures to modify at least one of the network configuration and the devices that make up the network in order to improve the network's trustworthiness evaluation results. The improvement plan may be, for example, a change to the network configuration, including adding or removing devices, or a change to the devices. Alternatively, the improvement plan may be an improvement to the device's trustworthiness evaluation results. For example, assume that the trustworthiness evaluation index is the presence or absence of a performance evaluation test result, and the network's trustworthiness evaluation results include a result that there is a device that does not have a performance evaluation test result. In this case, the improvement plan formulation unit 160 may formulate an improvement plan that includes testing the device that does not have a test result. The improvement plan formulation unit 160 may formulate the network improvement plan by referring to standard evaluation results in the industry in which the service provider is included, or improvement plans used by other companies. For example, the improvement plan formulation unit 160 may formulate an improvement plan for an item that significantly deviates from the standard evaluation results. The improvement plan formulation unit 160 may formulate an improvement plan for a device included in the network by referring to the improvement plan provided by the manufacturer of the device included in the network. For example, if the firmware of a device has been updated, the improvement plan formulation unit 160 may formulate an improvement plan to apply the latest firmware provided by the device manufacturer. The output unit 140 then outputs the improvement plan to the service provider. As a result, the service provider can improve the reliability of the network by referring to the improvement plan output by the evaluation device 12.

[0045] 6 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation device 13 according to a fourth embodiment. The evaluation device 13 includes a validity determination unit 170 in addition to the configuration of the evaluation device 10. The evaluation device 13 may include a certificate creation unit 150, an improvement plan formulation unit 160, or both the certificate creation unit 150 and the improvement plan formulation unit 160.

[0046] The validity determination unit 170 determines the validity of the network trust evaluation index. The validity of the trust evaluation index indicates whether the trust evaluation index is appropriate as a criterion for determining the trust of the network. The validity determination unit 170 may determine the validity of the trust evaluation index, for example, using the total value or average value of items included in the network trust evaluation result. Alternatively, the validity determination unit 170 may determine the validity of the trust evaluation index when the network trust evaluation result includes an item that cannot be determined, for example, when there is no trust evaluation result for the corresponding device. Alternatively, the validity determination unit 170 may determine the validity of the trust evaluation index when at least some of the trust evaluation results do not satisfy a threshold. Alternatively, the validity determination unit 170 may determine the validity of the trust evaluation index by comparing it with a standard trust evaluation index in the industry to which the service provider belongs or an average of trust evaluation indexes used by other companies. Alternatively, the validity determination unit 170 may determine validity based on the consistency or reciprocal relationship between items included in the trust evaluation index. Alternatively, the validity determination unit 170 may determine validity based on the ratio of devices related to the trust evaluation index to the entire network in the network configuration, or the range of related devices. The validity determination unit 170 may divide the trust evaluation index into multiple groups and determine the validity of each group. Then, the output unit 140 outputs the validity of the trust evaluation index to the service provider. As a result, the service provider can understand the validity of the trust evaluation index based on the validity output by the evaluation device 13.

[0047] The determination result of the validity of the trust evaluation index may be expressed as validity or may be expressed using a numerical value between 0.0 and 1.0. Furthermore, if the trust evaluation index is invalid, for example, if the validity is lower than a threshold, the validity determination unit 170 may output to the service provider via the output unit 140 that the trust evaluation index is invalid. At this time, the validity determination unit 170 may output to the service provider the determined validity value and the determination content used to calculate the validity value. In this case, the service provider may, for example, reset the trust evaluation index and output it to the evaluation device 13. The validity determination unit 170 may repeat the above operation until the trust evaluation index becomes valid, for example, until the validity of the trust evaluation index becomes equal to or greater than a threshold. Then, if the trust evaluation index becomes valid, the validity determination unit 170 may notify the trust evaluation unit 130 that the trust evaluation index is valid.

[0048] When the trust evaluation index is determined to be valid, the trust evaluation unit 130 may acquire the trust evaluation index from the validity determination unit 170. An example of the operation in this case will be described. For example, the target information acquisition unit 120 outputs the acquired trust evaluation index to the validity determination unit 170. The validity determination unit 170 determines the validity of the trust evaluation index, and when the trust evaluation index is invalid, outputs information indicating the need to reset the trust evaluation index to a service provider or the like via the output unit 140. The information indicating the need to reset the trust evaluation index indicates that resetting is necessary or the degree to which resetting is necessary. For example, the validity determination unit 170 may output a reset instruction to the service provider via the output unit 140, or may output the determined validity value and threshold value. Then, the validity determination unit 170 determines the validity of the trust evaluation index reacquired by the target information acquisition unit 120. The validity determination unit 170 executes the operation of resetting the trust evaluation index until the trust evaluation index becomes valid. Then, when the trust evaluation index becomes valid, the validity determination unit 170 may output the trust evaluation index to the trust evaluation unit 130. Note that the trust evaluation unit 130 may acquire the validity from the validity determination unit 170 and execute the operation of resetting the trust evaluation index as described above.

[0049] The trust evaluation unit 130 may use the validity of the trust evaluation index in evaluating the trust. For example, when the analysis results of the test items are the same, the trust evaluation unit 130 may determine that the network trust evaluation result when the validity is low is lower than the network trust evaluation result when the validity is high.

[0050] <Hardware Configuration> Next, the hardware configuration of the evaluation devices 10 to 13 will be described with reference to the drawings. Hereinafter, the evaluation devices 10 to 13 will be collectively referred to as the "evaluation device 10, etc." Each component of the evaluation device 10, etc. may be configured with a hardware circuit. Alternatively, each component of the evaluation device 10, etc. may be configured using multiple devices connected via a network. For example, the evaluation device 10, etc. may be configured using cloud computing. Alternatively, multiple components of the evaluation device 10, etc. may be configured with a single piece of hardware.

[0051] Alternatively, the evaluation device 10 or the like may be realized as a computer device including a central processing unit (CPU), read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), and a network interface card (NIC). Fig. 7 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a computer device 600, which is an example of the hardware configuration of the evaluation device 10 or the like. The computer device 600 includes a CPU 610, a ROM 620, a RAM 630, a storage device 640, and a NIC 650.

[0052] The CPU 610 loads a program from at least one of the ROM 620 and the storage device 640. The CPU 610 then controls the RAM 630, the storage device 640, and the NIC 650 based on the loaded program. The computer device 600 controls these components to implement the functions of the evaluation result acquisition unit 110, the target information acquisition unit 120, the trust evaluation unit 130, the output unit 140, the certificate creation unit 150, the improvement plan formulation unit 160, and the validity determination unit 170. In this manner, the evaluation device 10 and the like may implement their functions as a combination of hardware and software. The CPU 610 may read a program contained in a computer-readable recording medium 690 that stores the program using a recording medium reading device (not shown). Alternatively, the CPU 610 may receive a program from an external device (not shown) via the NIC 650, store it in the RAM 630 or the storage device 640, and operate based on the stored program.

[0053] The ROM 620 stores programs and fixed data executed by the CPU 610. The ROM 620 is, for example, a programmable ROM (P-ROM) or a flash ROM. The RAM 630 temporarily stores programs and data executed by the CPU 610. The RAM 630 is, for example, a dynamic RAM (D-RAM). The storage device 640 stores data and programs that the computer device 600 stores long-term. The storage device 640 may store the device trust evaluation results acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit 110. The storage device 640 may also operate as a temporary storage device for the CPU 610. The storage device 640 is, for example, a hard disk device, a magneto-optical disk device, a solid state drive (SSD), or a disk array device.

[0054] The ROM 620 and the storage device 640 are non-volatile (non-transitory) recording media. On the other hand, the RAM 630 is a volatile (transitory) recording media. The CPU 610 can operate based on programs stored in the ROM 620, the storage device 640, and the RAM 630. In other words, the CPU 610 can operate using either a non-volatile recording medium or a volatile recording medium. When realizing each function, the CPU 610 may use at least one of the RAM 630 and the storage device 640 as a temporary storage medium for programs and data.

[0055] The NIC 650 relays data exchange with external devices (not shown) via a network. The NIC 650 relays communication with, for example, a service provider's device. The NIC 650 is, for example, a local area network (LAN) card. Furthermore, the NIC 650 is not limited to being wired, and may be wireless.

[0056] The computer device 600 configured in this manner executes the operations of the components in the evaluation device 10 and the like, thereby realizing the functions of the evaluation device 10 and the like.

[0057] <Example of Usage System> An example of a system using the evaluation device 10 and the like will be described using the evaluation device 11. FIG. 8 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of a system 60 using the evaluation device 11. The system 60 includes the evaluation device 11, a network 20 used by a service provider to provide a service, a terminal 30 used by the service provider, and a terminal 40 used by a service recipient. The service provider operates the terminal 30 to output configuration information, device information, and a trust evaluation index for the network 20 to the evaluation device 11. The evaluation device 11 operates as described above to create a certificate regarding the trust of the network and output it to the terminal 30 of the service provider. Note that the certificate is data including both data indicating that no tampering has occurred in the network trust evaluation result and the network trust evaluation result itself.

[0058] The service provider operates terminal 30 to output the acquired certificate to terminal 40 of a service recipient on network 20. The service recipient determines whether or not to receive the service provided from network 20 based on the certificate acquired by terminal 40. If the service recipient determines to receive the service, he or she operates terminal 40 to receive the service provided from network 20.

[0059] Although the present invention has been described above with reference to the embodiments, the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments. Various modifications that can be understood by those skilled in the art can be made to the configuration and details of the present invention within the scope of the present invention.

[0060] REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 10 Evaluation device 11 Evaluation device 12 Evaluation device 13 Evaluation device 20 Network 30 Terminal 40 Terminal 60 System 110 Evaluation result acquisition unit 120 Target information acquisition unit 130 Trust evaluation unit 131 Inspection item creation unit 132 Inspection item judgment unit 133 Evaluation result creation unit 140 Output unit 150 Certificate creation unit 160 Improvement plan formulation unit 170 Validity judgment unit 600 Computer device 610 CPU 620 ROM 630 RAM 640 Storage device 650 NIC 690 Recording medium

Claims

1. An evaluation result acquisition means for acquiring a trust evaluation result of each device; A target information acquisition means for acquiring configuration information of a network to be evaluated, device information about devices constituting the network, and a trust evaluation index of the network; a trust evaluation means for evaluating the trust of the network based on the configuration information, the device information, the trust evaluation index, and a trust evaluation result of the device; an output means for outputting a result of the trust evaluation of the network; An evaluation device comprising:

2. The trust evaluation means includes: an inspection item creation means for creating inspection items for devices for evaluating the trustworthiness of the network based on the configuration information and the trustworthiness evaluation index; an inspection item determination means for determining the inspection item based on the device information and a result of the trust evaluation of the device; an evaluation result generating means for generating a trust evaluation result of the network based on the trust evaluation index of the network and the analysis result of the inspection items; The evaluation device according to claim 1 .

3. a certificate generating unit for generating a certificate regarding the result of the trust evaluation of the network; The output means outputs the certificate. The evaluation device according to claim 1 .

4. The method further includes: developing an improvement plan for improving the reliability of the network based on a result of the network reliability evaluation; The output means outputs the improvement plan. The evaluation device according to claim 1 .

5. The method further includes a validity determination unit that determines the validity of the trust evaluation index of the network, The output means outputs the validity. The evaluation device according to claim 1 .

6. The validity determination means outputting information indicating the necessity of resetting the trust evaluation index of the network via the output means when the trust evaluation index of the network is not valid; If the trust evaluation index of the network is valid, output the trust evaluation index of the network to the trust evaluation means. The evaluation device according to claim 5 .

7. The trust evaluation means evaluates the trust based on the validity of the trust evaluation index of the network. The evaluation device according to claim 5 .

8. The trust evaluation means evaluates the trust based on information related to a service provider that provides a service using the network. The evaluation device according to claim 1 .

9. Obtain the trust evaluation results for each device, Acquire configuration information of a network to be evaluated, device information about devices constituting the network, and a trust evaluation index of the network; evaluating the trustworthiness of the network based on the configuration information, the device information, the trustworthiness evaluation index, and a result of the trustworthiness evaluation of the device; Output the trust evaluation result of the network. Evaluation method.

10. A process of acquiring a trust evaluation result for each device; A process of acquiring configuration information of a network to be evaluated, device information about devices constituting the network, and a trust evaluation index of the network; A process of evaluating the trustworthiness of the network based on the configuration information, the device information, the trustworthiness evaluation index, and a result of the trustworthiness evaluation of the device; A process of outputting a trust evaluation result of the network; A program that causes a computer to execute the following.